The San Diego, California-based company’s RevShare revenue sharing scheme is the latest attempt to attract hardware manufacturers to its Linux-based desktop operating system rather than Microsoft’s Windows. RevShare is a new option in the company’s Builder Program, and will deliver to hardware manufacturers up to 20% of the profits from premium upgrades or service purchases.

The company’s Builder Program was launched in June 2002 as it announced a flat-fee licensing plan for computer manufacturers, under which they pay a $500 monthly membership fee, which entitles them to install LindowsOS on an unlimited number of computer systems. RevShare has been added to the program with no additional cost to partners.

The company has highlighted that this program is unlike Microsoft’s per-unit pricing scheme, and additionally that there are no volume commitments for system builders that sign up to the program, and no software activation codes requiring tracking and auditing. The program is particularly targeted at narrow margin unbranded PC manufacturers.

As well as battling for the hearts and minds of PC manufacturers, Lindows.com and Microsoft have also come head to head in the US courts, where Microsoft has twice been denied a preliminary injunction against Lindows.com in its attempt to stop the company using the Lindows name for both its company and its software.

Microsoft filed suit against Lindows.com in the US Court for the Western District of Washington, asserting that the Lindows name was designed to confuse the public and infringed on its Windows trademark. But In March 2002, US District Judge John Coughenour dismissed Microsoft’s requests for a preliminary injunction and further raised questions as to whether Windows is entitled to trademark protection at all.

After Microsoft had failed in its attempt to persuade the Judge to reconsider his decision in May 2002, Lindows.com sensed victory and filed motion for Summary Judgment on Genericness in October 2002, arguing that Windows is a generic term for the features of a windowing environment and should not be protected by trademark.

A jury trial to decide if Microsoft trademark is invalid has now been delayed until December 2003 after the court ordered Microsoft to produce more than 300 boxes of evidence, including documentation from the 1992 Apple versus Microsoft look-and-feel court case.

Source: Computerwire